Re: [ANN] Lua 5.2.0 (work2) now available

[liam mail <liam.list@...>]

2010/1/14 Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>

> What does concern me is that I ran ALL.lua to find a couple of errors
> because at least some of the scripts have not been updated and used removed
> functions, another hits an assert, table.lua requires a user to look at the
> code to see how to exit the loop etc.

Sorry about that. The next work version will fix this (probably by removing
all tests except hello.lua :-) Starting at alpha the tests will include correct
meaningful code.

Really?
I see the smiley but am I unsure if that is some kind of joke?

Is not the point of releasing these working revisions to gain feed back and to find what is working and what has problems? 

The problem is no one has reported this as no one runs the tests, I feel this is for a couple of reasons:
Firstly it is not made nice and simple to run them, the library provides make test yet all this does is run a hello world example.

The test requires user input instead of testing against known inputs and therefore expected outputs.
The results give no feed back if the they pass or fail, just print pretty numbers and ascii art. I still do not know which tests passed.

From what I have seen people on the list devise there own tests to see if the library has compiled correct and doing what it should. Do you not think it is better to correct the tests now? People will then start to run them, giving feed back upon the results. When people come with a library related problem you could always ask, what is the result of the tests.

Personally I would write it so that make tests actually ran all the tests without any user input and with feedback on the result status of the tests.

Liam